To whom it may concern: International human rights law and global public goods

Research output: Working paperDiscussion paperOther research output

36 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Public goods and human rights are sometimes treated as intimately related, if not interchangeable, strategies to address matters of common global concern. The aim of the present contribution is to disentangle the two notions to shed some critical light on their respective potential to attend to contemporary problems of globalization. I distinguish the standard economic approach to public goods as a supposedly value-neutral technique to coordinate economic activity between states and markets from a political conception of human rights law that empowers individuals to partake in the definition of the public good. On this basis, I contend that framing global public goods and universal human rights in terms of interests and values that ‘we all’ hold in common tends to conceal or evade conflicts about their proper interpretation and implementation. This raises important normative questions with regard to the political and legal accountability of global ordering in both domains. The public goods approach has responded to this problem through extending the scope of political jurisdiction over public goods to encompass all those ‘affected’ by their costs and benefits. This finds its counterpart in attempts in the human rights debate to legally account for the global human rights impacts of public goods through extending human rights jurisdiction beyond state territory. By way of conclusion I contend that both approaches are indicative of a ‘horizontal’ transformation of statehood under conditions of globalization aimed at recovering the public good beyond the international order of states.
Original languageEnglish
PublisherWZB, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung
Number of pages23
Publication statusPublished - 2015

Publication series

NameWZB Center for Global Constitutionalism Discussion Papers

Fingerprint

human rights
Law
jurisdiction
globalization
statehood
economic approach
Values
responsibility
interpretation
present
market
costs
economics

Keywords

  • human rights
  • public goods
  • globalisation
  • jurisdiction
  • all affected principle
  • democracy
  • welfare economics
  • international law

Cite this

Augenstein, D. (2015). To whom it may concern: International human rights law and global public goods. (WZB Center for Global Constitutionalism Discussion Papers). WZB, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung.
Augenstein, Daniel. / To whom it may concern : International human rights law and global public goods. WZB, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, 2015. (WZB Center for Global Constitutionalism Discussion Papers).
@techreport{3e6d8fd9c6b54bbaa1f8874d6bc31710,
title = "To whom it may concern: International human rights law and global public goods",
abstract = "Public goods and human rights are sometimes treated as intimately related, if not interchangeable, strategies to address matters of common global concern. The aim of the present contribution is to disentangle the two notions to shed some critical light on their respective potential to attend to contemporary problems of globalization. I distinguish the standard economic approach to public goods as a supposedly value-neutral technique to coordinate economic activity between states and markets from a political conception of human rights law that empowers individuals to partake in the definition of the public good. On this basis, I contend that framing global public goods and universal human rights in terms of interests and values that ‘we all’ hold in common tends to conceal or evade conflicts about their proper interpretation and implementation. This raises important normative questions with regard to the political and legal accountability of global ordering in both domains. The public goods approach has responded to this problem through extending the scope of political jurisdiction over public goods to encompass all those ‘affected’ by their costs and benefits. This finds its counterpart in attempts in the human rights debate to legally account for the global human rights impacts of public goods through extending human rights jurisdiction beyond state territory. By way of conclusion I contend that both approaches are indicative of a ‘horizontal’ transformation of statehood under conditions of globalization aimed at recovering the public good beyond the international order of states.",
keywords = "human rights, public goods, globalisation, jurisdiction, all affected principle, democracy, welfare economics, international law",
author = "Daniel Augenstein",
year = "2015",
language = "English",
series = "WZB Center for Global Constitutionalism Discussion Papers",
publisher = "WZB, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin f{\"u}r Sozialforschung",
type = "WorkingPaper",
institution = "WZB, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin f{\"u}r Sozialforschung",

}

Augenstein, D 2015 'To whom it may concern: International human rights law and global public goods' WZB Center for Global Constitutionalism Discussion Papers, WZB, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung.

To whom it may concern : International human rights law and global public goods. / Augenstein, Daniel.

WZB, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, 2015. (WZB Center for Global Constitutionalism Discussion Papers).

Research output: Working paperDiscussion paperOther research output

TY - UNPB

T1 - To whom it may concern

T2 - International human rights law and global public goods

AU - Augenstein, Daniel

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Public goods and human rights are sometimes treated as intimately related, if not interchangeable, strategies to address matters of common global concern. The aim of the present contribution is to disentangle the two notions to shed some critical light on their respective potential to attend to contemporary problems of globalization. I distinguish the standard economic approach to public goods as a supposedly value-neutral technique to coordinate economic activity between states and markets from a political conception of human rights law that empowers individuals to partake in the definition of the public good. On this basis, I contend that framing global public goods and universal human rights in terms of interests and values that ‘we all’ hold in common tends to conceal or evade conflicts about their proper interpretation and implementation. This raises important normative questions with regard to the political and legal accountability of global ordering in both domains. The public goods approach has responded to this problem through extending the scope of political jurisdiction over public goods to encompass all those ‘affected’ by their costs and benefits. This finds its counterpart in attempts in the human rights debate to legally account for the global human rights impacts of public goods through extending human rights jurisdiction beyond state territory. By way of conclusion I contend that both approaches are indicative of a ‘horizontal’ transformation of statehood under conditions of globalization aimed at recovering the public good beyond the international order of states.

AB - Public goods and human rights are sometimes treated as intimately related, if not interchangeable, strategies to address matters of common global concern. The aim of the present contribution is to disentangle the two notions to shed some critical light on their respective potential to attend to contemporary problems of globalization. I distinguish the standard economic approach to public goods as a supposedly value-neutral technique to coordinate economic activity between states and markets from a political conception of human rights law that empowers individuals to partake in the definition of the public good. On this basis, I contend that framing global public goods and universal human rights in terms of interests and values that ‘we all’ hold in common tends to conceal or evade conflicts about their proper interpretation and implementation. This raises important normative questions with regard to the political and legal accountability of global ordering in both domains. The public goods approach has responded to this problem through extending the scope of political jurisdiction over public goods to encompass all those ‘affected’ by their costs and benefits. This finds its counterpart in attempts in the human rights debate to legally account for the global human rights impacts of public goods through extending human rights jurisdiction beyond state territory. By way of conclusion I contend that both approaches are indicative of a ‘horizontal’ transformation of statehood under conditions of globalization aimed at recovering the public good beyond the international order of states.

KW - human rights

KW - public goods

KW - globalisation

KW - jurisdiction

KW - all affected principle

KW - democracy

KW - welfare economics

KW - international law

M3 - Discussion paper

T3 - WZB Center for Global Constitutionalism Discussion Papers

BT - To whom it may concern

PB - WZB, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung

ER -

Augenstein D. To whom it may concern: International human rights law and global public goods. WZB, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung. 2015. (WZB Center for Global Constitutionalism Discussion Papers).